Thursday, March 30, 2017

Francis and Population Control

Francis has issued a challenge to traditional Catholics by welcoming
prominent population-control advocates such as Paul Ehrlich to speak
before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
earlier this year. This invitation was extended in the context of Pope
Francis’s call for “sustainable development” and warnings against global
warming and alleged corporate destruction of the environment. In
extending this invitation to Ehrlich and other population-control
advocates, this pope’s Vatican gives further evidence of embracing
left-wing environmental, economic and population-control positions.

Calls for Sustainable Development
The Vatican’s invitation to Paul Ehrlich came on the heels of a
series of pronouncements by Pope Francis on the environment, sustainable
growth and criticism of global capitalism. In the early summer of 2015,
Pope Francis issued an encyclical, Laudato si, which warned of
impending global disaster because of climate change. The encyclical
distinguished between human needs and appetites.
Human needs, the encyclical declared, are small and non-negotiable,
while appetites are potentially unlimited and harmful. Because human
appetite is unlimited, Pope Francis counseled, consumerism must be
constrained and conventional fuels must be replaced by renewable energy.
The tone of the encyclical was dire and, at times, graphic. For
example, Pope Francis declared that “The Earth, our home, is beginning
to look like an immense pile of filth.”
In preparing for the encyclical, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
in April 2015 had sponsored a meeting of scientists, theologians and
economists to discuss the relationship between poverty, economic
development and climate change. This summit left no room for voices who
could point out that economic development over the last century has
lifted millions of people out of poverty, or for any discussion of the
misallocation and corrupt use of funds sent to developing countries. Nor
did the conference allow much room for those having different views as
to the causes of climate change. United Nations Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon, who offered the keynote address, set the tone for the summit.
He urged world leaders to ratify the Paris climate change accord that
had been drafted in December 2014.

Francis the Anti-Capitalist
Pope Francis’ call for sustainable growth and warnings about climate
change should be seen against the backdrop of his propensity to demonize
capitalism. Inequality of wealth, he contends, is caused by free
markets and the idolatry of money by greedy capitalists. While Pope
Francis attempts to qualify his critique of capitalism by using
modifiers such as “unbridled” capitalism, his language describing free
markets as “the dung of the devil” lacks qualification for average
listeners. He calls for income redistribution through government action,
greater government regulation of markets, and higher minimum wages for
all workers.
In his 2013 letter Evangelii Gaudium, Francis wrote that the
economy “can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as
attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby
adding to the ranks of the excluded.” In 2015 he proclaimed that the
poor have “sacred rights” to labor, lodging and land. Just to ensure his
views were not misunderstood, he referred to global austerity measures
by the European Union and the World Bank as a form of “new colonialism.”
More recently, Pope Francis unhelpfully weighed in on an Italian
labor issue. The “Sky Italia” TV platform announced on March 14 that it
would be downsizing and moving some 300 employees and their families
from Rome to Milan, after selling the firm’s digital properties to
Quantum Native Solutions. At his general audience the next morning
Francis offered a special greeting to the employees of Sky Italia,
adding, “Those who engage in economic maneuvering to make murky deals,
closing factories and businesses and laying off workers in the process,
commit a very grave sin.”Layoffs Are a ‘Grave Sin’?
Does Francis really mean that keeping a business alive in a
competitive market, even if it means cutting labor costs, is a grave
sin? Does he not realize that running a company into bankruptcy or
closure — which would destroy all its employees’ jobs as well as lose
the investors’ money — would be a worse outcome?

Pope Francis places his economic views within the tradition of
Catholic social justice. He interprets the commandment “Thou shalt not
kill” as an injunction against economic injustice. He argues that income
inequality and economic exclusion constitute another way of killing
people. Although he is a critic of “liberation theology,” underlying his
views about income inequality, financial markets and social justice is a
confusion between the meaning of Catholic social justice and socialism,
indeed Marxism. Pope Francis once declared that “Marxist ideology is
wrong,” only to add, “I have met many Marxists in my life who are good
people . . . . There is nothing in the [Marxist] exhortation that cannot
be found in the social doctrine of the church.”
This facile comparison between Catholic social doctrine and Marxism
is astonishing. Marxists claim to be concerned about the poor, express
anguish over social inequality and abhor consumerism, but the Marxist
profession of faith calls for the abolition of marriage, all private
property and religion (a false ideology), and the dictatorship of the
proletariat. Christ’s revolutionary message of redemption for all God’s
children is not Marxism under any guise.A Benign View of the State
What Pope Francis and Marxists share, it seems, is a benign view of
the state. Pope Francis calls for more government intervention in the
economy to regulate the environment and to redistribute income. His
apparent sanguine view of the one-party state in communist China and
Cuba can only be seen as naïve. His consideration of a proposal to allow
the Chinese state to appoint Catholic bishops harkens back to the worst
aspects of the pre-Reformation church, which allowed European monarchs
to appoint corrupt bishops in their provinces. Does Pope Francis believe
that the Chinese state will appoint bishops who are not compliant with
one-party rule in China? Is it even conceivable that Chinese government
authorities will appoint bishops who dissent from wholesale destruction
of churches, suppression of the free press, and state repression of
worker rights and religious liberty?
Pope Francis appears to welcome with open arms “dialogue” with the
left and those who hold progressive views, while closing the door to
theological traditionalists, political conservatives and proponents of
free markets. He ignores that advanced industrial and post-industrial
countries have achieved and pursue environmental measures to “save the
planet.” He apparently fails to see centralized governmental power as a
threat to individual political liberty and genuine economic freedom.

Who is Paul Ehrlich?

This brings us to the Vatican’s invitation to Paul Ehrlich and other
population-control activists to speak before the Pontifical Academy of
Sciences. Ehrlich, a biologist at Stanford University, is best known for
his best-selling book, The Population Bomb, published in 1968.
The book warned of a global overpopulation crisis that portended mass
starvation, riots, economic depression and destruction of the
environment. His neo-Malthusian argument raised the alarm against a
population explosion in developed and developing countries.
His solution was “radical surgery” to excise the “cancer” of runaway
human population growth. Without strong coercive measures for population
control, he predicted, hundreds of millions would starve to death. He
argued that it was already too late to avoid famines that would kill
millions. Ehrlich’s apocalyptic predictions found support within the
burgeoning environmental movement in the 1970s. Environmentalists and
organizations such as the Sierra Club and Zero Population Growth began
calling for coercive measures to control world and American population
growth. Environmentalists proposed putting contraceptive chemicals in
water supplies; penalties for families having too many children; and
federally financed abortions.

With the support of the United Nations, governmental and foundation
funds, population-control programs were launched in developing
countries. These programs caused untold suffering for those caught in
the middle, especially women and children. In India, the Indira Gandhi
government constructed sterilization camps for men and women. Armed
soldiers were sent to villages throughout India forcing men and women to
be sterilized. In Southeast Asia, women were encouraged to undergo
sterilization or accept contraceptive implants, often with offers of
food, sometimes as little as a bag of rice. Many of these women suffered
from pelvic inflammation diseases caused by implants inserted by
foreign aid workers who abandoned the women without follow-up care.
Ehrlich won widespread praise for his book, appearing on hundreds of
television and radio programs. The book went through 23 editions. There
were only a few dissenters. One was the University of Chicago-trained
economist, Julian Simon, who publicly disputed Ehrlich’s grim
predictions by arguing that human ingenuity and technology would
increase food production and address environmental issues. In the pages
of Social Science Quarterly in 1980, Simon challenged Ehrlich
to a $1,000 bet testing their competing visions of the future. The bet
was simple: Take five industrial metals over a ten-year period to see if
prices went up or down.

If Ehrlich was correct about population growth exhausting world
supplies, the prices of metals for industrial use should rise
astronomically. Ehrlich accepted the bet, but Simon proved correct.
Prices of the agreed five industrial metals went down. Ehrlich never
paid up on the bet — but not for lack of money. He had become a
millionaire off the sales of his books and speaking fees.
In the international arena, environmentalists joined feminists in
calling for controlling population growth. United Nations Conferences on
Women endorsed population-control measures and programs. Opposition to
environmentalist and feminist delegations came from Vatican delegates,
who often joined forces with delegations from Islamic countries. This
perhaps is the fullest irony of the Vatican’s invitation for Ehrlich and
population-control advocates to participate in a closed-door workshop
on “How to Save the Natural World on Which We Depend.” The Vatican, one
of the strongest opponents of population control in the last half
century or more, was now willing to listen, if not accept, the advice of
Ehrlich and other population-control advocates.Saving the Natural World

The February 2017 Vatican workshop on “How to Save the Natural World”
brought international experts together to propose political, social and
economic policies to make development “sustainable” and prevent further
biological extinction. The program sought to prevent the extinction of
thousands of different species on the planet. Pre-conference material
warned that allowing the extinction of life-supporting species “will
probably be the sin for which our descendants will be least likely to
forgive us.”

Ehrlich was one of the main participants at the conference. He was
joined at the workshop by other population-control advocates including
John Bongaarts, vice president of the Population Council, a
Rockefeller-funded organization, and Mathis Wackernagel, president of
Global Footprint Network. These invitations were not surprising given
that one of the principal conference organizers was Sir Partha Dasgupta,
an economist at Cambridge University. He was known for predicting that
climate change in Africa and resulting famine would lead to “100 million
Africans trying to swim across the Mediterranean” in search of food.
Ehrlich has not mellowed with age, either; in fact, he has become even more radical. In his most recent book, Hope on Earth: A Conversation
(2014), he condemned “God-fearing people” for “trying to maintain their
rigid positions, especially trying to control the lives of women.” In
particular, he called opposition to “controlling reproduction” as
“unethical as any major affront to the environment or terrorist act.” In
effect, he branded Catholics, evangelical Protestants and Mormons who
opposed abortion or federally funded contraception for women as
“terrorists” and destroyers of the environment.

Ehrlich has never backed away from his longtime claim that the world
stands on the verge of environmental, social and political catastrophe
because of rampant population growth, even though nearly every
demographer in the world knows that fertility levels have fallen
everywhere and remain deeply depressed in every industrially advanced
country, a trend that is also reaching Latin America and much of the
Middle East and Africa. Furthermore, Ehrlich remains a strong proponent
of abortion as an instrument for population control, even abortion for
sex selection.
The first week’s meeting of the academy barred all reporters from
covering the event. Critics, such as Riccardo Cascioli, president of the
European Center for the Study of Population, Environment and
Development, opined that the meetings were closed because the Vatican
was trying to keep the press from reporting its shift in favor of
population control. Cascioli, who attended the conference, told the
press, “This meeting is not an isolated incident. It is the outcome of a
process that has been going on for a few years, one that is leading the
Holy See to become an instrument of the birth-control movement.” He
revealed that at the closed meetings many speakers called for the
“physical elimination of the poor” in order to “eliminate poverty.”
At the conference, environmental radical Peter Raven asserted, “We
need at some point to have a limited number of people, which is why Pope
Francis and his three most recent predecessors have always argued that
you should not have more children than you can bring up properly.” Raven
went on to declare that “we need a more limited number of people in the
world” because “the problem is one of inequality.” He maintained that
controlling population is necessary to address “social injustice
worldwide.” Raven used the language of social justice, love and
compassion, and sustainability — all fine-sounding words — to support
controlling population.Wanting 6 Billion Fewer People
But at a news conference days earlier, Ehrlich revealed his real agenda when he advocated in an interview with The Guardian for reducing the world’s population by 6 billion people
to bring it down to 1 billion people. He stated that he was “thrilled”
with the direction Francis is taking the Church. If Ehrlich and other
population controllers, progressives and Catholic liberals are thrilled
with the direction Francis is taking the Vatican, others within the
Church are dismayed by apparent Church support for radical population
control, especially in an era of below-replacement birth rates in
industrialized countries.

The Church faces difficult times in this age of secularism.
Throughout Africa and Asia, people have turned to the Catholic Church to
give new meaning to their lives. These people have discovered hope in
Christ’s message of the dignity of every human life. In the United
States and Europe, traditional Catholics know that capitulation to
secularism has led to steep declines in membership of mainstream
Protestant churches. They understand that Christianity has played a
central role in the development of capitalism, which has lifted millions
of people out of poverty throughout the world. Calling for fewer people
in the world and denouncing capitalism are not the answers to today’s
problems, no matter the good intentions of a pontiff trying to be in
touch with the times.

TRADCATKNIGHT VIDEOS!

TCK Youtube Channel

TRADCATKNIGHT- TOP 3 CATHOLIC YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Archbishop Lefebvre

“This Second Vatican Council Reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt; it comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this Reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the Reform.”

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Archbishop Lefebvre

“And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith. ….Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion.”

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON TUMBLR!

TCK Facebook

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON PINTEREST

Archbishop Lefebvre

That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church...

Fr. Hesse Summary on Vatican II

Vatican II = Heretical & Schismatic

Exposing Vatican II & New Mass, Fr. Villa

Archbishop Lefebvre

“Well, we are not of this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We are of the religion of all time; we are of the Catholic religion. We are not of this 'universal religion' as they call it today-this is not the Catholic religion any more. We are not of this Liberal, Modernist religion which has its own worship, its own priests, its own faith, its own catechisms, its own Bible, the 'ecumenical Bible'-these things we do not accept."

Traditional Quotes & Prayers

The Real 3rd Secret of Fatima

Inlcudes Vatican II and the soon Apostate Church..."...because Fatima is a very apocalyptic message. It says that no matter what happens there are going to be terrible wars, there are going to be diseases, whole nations are going to be wiped out, there are going to be 3 days darkness, there are going to be epidemics that will wipe out whole nations overnight, parts of the earth will be washed away at sea and violent tornadoes and storms. It's not a nice message at all." Fr Malachi Martin

SSPX Marian Corps Donations

Marian Corps-Australasia

Fr. Chazal

Fr. Girouard

Or send a cheque made out to Fr. Patrick Girouard at : P.O.Box 1543, Aldergrove, BC, V4W 2V1, Canada.

St. Marcel Initiative

Or, if you prefer, in the U.S., make your contribution by telephone, toll free: 855-4-S. Marcel (855.476.2723), or internationally, by sending your donation directly to donations@stmarcelinitiative.com via PayPal.

TCK TESTIMONIALS

Eric Gajewski, Founder of DefeatModernism(formerly known as Defeat the Heresies)

Resistance Forum

True Traditionalist Forum

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past."A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

ALEXA RANK

Find The Rank Of Any Website

Current Crusaders Online Worldwide (RealTime)

St. Bernard:

Go forth confidently then, you knights, and repel the foes of the cross of Christ with a stalwart heart. Know that neither death nor life can separate you from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ, and in every peril repeat, "Whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's." What a glory to return in victory from such a battle! How blessed to die there as a martyr! Rejoice, brave athlete, if you live and conquer in the Lord; but glory and exult even more if you die and join your Lord. Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord!

How secure, I say, is life when death is anticipated without fear; or rather when it is desired with feeling and embraced with reverence! How holy and secure this knighthood and how entirely free of the double risk run by those men who fight not for Christ! Whenever you go forth, O worldly warrior, you must fear lest the bodily death of your foe should mean your own spiritual death, or lest perhaps your body and soul together should be slain by him.

Indeed, danger or victory for a Christian depends on the dispositions of his heart and not on the fortunes of war. If he fights for a good reason, the issue of his fight can never be evil; and likewise the results can never be considered good if the reason were evil and the intentions perverse. If you happen to be killed while you are seeking only to kill another, you die a murderer. If you succeed, and by your will to overcome and to conquer you perchance kill a man, you live a murderer. Now it will not do to be a murderer, living or dead, victorious or vanquished. What an unhappy victory--to have conquered a man while yielding to vice, and to indulge in an empty glory at his fall when wrath and pride have gotten the better of you!

But what of those who kill neither in the heat of revenge nor in the swelling of pride, but simply in order to save themselves? Even this sort of victory I would not call good, since bodily death is really a lesser evil than spiritual death. The soul need not die when the body does. No, it is the soul which sins that shall die.

The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes, and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller, but, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ towards evildoers and he is rightly considered a defender of Christians. Should he be killed himself, we know that he has not perished, but has come safely into port.

Once he finds himself in the thick of battle, this knight sets aside his previous gentleness, as if to say, "Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord; am I not disgusted with your enemies?" These men at once fall violently upon the foe, regarding them as so many sheep. No matter how outnumbered they are, they never regard these as fierce barbarians or as awe-inspiring hordes. Nor do they presume on their own strength, but trust in the Lord of armies to grant them the victory.

.

.

Saint Athanasius

"May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith?The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ..."You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day. "Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."